User talk:PEPSI697/Archive 1

Archive 1

Welcome

Here are some lamingtons to welcome you to WikiProject Australia!

G'day PEPSI697, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; they have helped improve Wikipedia and made it more informative. I hope you enjoy using Wikipedia and decide to make additional contributions.

As a contributor to Australian articles, you may like to connect with other Australian Wikipedians through the Australian Wikipedians' notice board and take a look at the activities in WikiProject Australia and associated sub-projects. Wikimedia Australia your local chapter organises editor training workshops, meetups and other events. If you would like to know more, email help@wikimedia.org.au.

If you are living in Australia and want to subscribe to location-based notices, you can add location userboxes to your user page.

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ~~~~; this will automatically produce your name and the date.

If you have any questions, please see Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, try the Wikipedia:Help desk, or ask me on my talk page. Or you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Some other resources to help new Wikipedians include:

How to edit a page

Editing tutorial

Picture tutorial

How to write a great article

Article titles

Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Thank you for signing up! Fork99 (talk) 20:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

You may also be interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian Transport, where centralised discussions about articles on transport in Australia happen. Fork99 (talk) 20:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. I appreciate that. PEPSI697 (talk) 01:41, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

No worries! By the way, regarding your edit on Lynbrook railway station which I just thanked you for, the relevant guideline on this is MOS:ORDINAL. You might also be interested in MOS:ENGVAR and MOS:DATEVAR. Fork99 (talk) 04:49, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! I will definitely keep doing that to keep up with Wikipedia’s policy on Dates, Months and Years. PEPSI697 (talk) 04:57, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

TIMEVAR at Sam Rubin

If that's the case, then why does MOS:TIME give "11 a.m." and "8 p.m." as examples? I don't think you're reading it correctly. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 07:43, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Sammi Brie,

Thank you for spotting it out. You can revert the edit I made if I read it incorrect if you want.

I think your right, I didn’t read the MOS:TIMEVAR correctly.

Thank you for the question and asking me!

Have a nice day. PEPSI697 (talk) 07:53, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

East Pakenham railway station

Hi, just to let you know, there shouldn't be any spaces between punctuation and a reference. Also, if you're editing from an Apple device which you might be since your edits are tagged with "mobile", please note that Wikipedia prefers using ' and not ’ for apostrophes; if you're using an iPhone or an iPad, you should press on the apostrophe key for a second and switch to the straight apostrophe.

We also had a discussion a while ago where Vicsig was decided to likely not be a reliable source somewhere on WT:AUSTS as it's a rail enthusiast page, check the talk archives somewhere for that if you would like. I would try to avoid using it, but don't go around removing it unless you have a better source.

One last thing, InternetArchiveBot doesn't frequently archive sources by itself, there is a tool to manually use it however. To access it, you need to go on the Desktop version of Wikipedia, click "View history" on the page you want, then under "External tools", click on "Fix dead links". Otherwise the direct link is https://iabot.wmcloud.org/. Then follow the prompts. Fork99 (talk) 05:21, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Fork99,

Thank you for leaving this message here. I didn't even know all of these stuff was against Wikipedia's TOS. (since I only joined Wikipedia a month ago and started editing then).

I am now aware of all of these stuff (like sources, bots and editing Wikipedia articles and projects (Mobile Wikipedia or Desktop Wikipedia).

However, I was aware that Vicsig was a railway enthusiast website since not every information is accurate, but I only just saw it just then archived at WT:AUSTS with lots of talks about it back in August 2023.

Also, just to let you know, this wasn't a deliberate vandalism on East Pakenham railway station I edited today, I didn't even know that Wikipedia's TOS doesn't is preferred not to do on what I did.

I did actually notice that you can hold on a key on an Apple devices (such as iPad or iPhone) and do that (I only knew that trick on letters, not on characters). Thank you for teaching me that trick.

In future, I'll be careful about what I edit or which sources I publish.

Thank you for letting me know that I can manually archive any websites (with Desktop version only)

Although, I do know how to edit on the desktop version of Wikipedia. For some reason, I prefer editing on Mobile Wikipedia, obviously, I did notice that there are tags under the lists of edits I made tagging "Mobile edit" or "Mobile web edit".

I also didn't even know that InternetArchiveBot doesn't automatically archive sources.

Thanks for letting me know. PEPSI697 (talk) 06:27, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

You have recently made edits related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. This is a standard message to inform you that articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 23:10, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@Red-tailed hawk: Thanks very much for leaving this on my talk page!

I'll try and keep remembering that in future edits on Wikipedia when editing on a living or recently deceased people. To keep articles to be good and meet the BLP policy.

Thank you very much for this introduction, I appreciate it.

‎ PEPSI697 (talk) 23:31, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Redirect links

Per WP:NOTBROKEN, systematically "fixing" redirect links, as you are doing at a large number of articles, is discouraged. There is no need to do it, and it clutters watchlists and page history with edits that do not improve the encyclopedia. Your time would be much better spent making substantial contributions to a smaller number of pages; making edits to a large number of pages that do not affect appearance or functionality is frowned upon. Triptothecottage (talk) 04:45, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Response to this, however, I try to make small contributions to Wikipedia (even though they are large at about 2,970~ edits in about 3 months after creation of this Wikimedia Foundation account). However, I always try to do my best at editing Wikipedia, but sometimes, I can screw things up by mistake when editing Wikipedia. However, to the revision history list, you can click on at maximum 500 if you would like to see more past revisions from years ago. However, seen from my contributions, there are large amount of Wikipedia. But behind the keyboard, I'm a human like lots of other contributors on Wikipedia. I know it sounds like "bot behaviour" but however, I'm trying to do my best at Wikipedia. However, to railway stations in Australia or railway lines in Australia, they don't get edited often at all, mainly at about once or even a few times a month. Just remember that I'm trying my best at Wikipedia, but try to not be against me too, I'm trying my best like you. I have a feeling that you're somehow against me PEPSI697 (talk) 05:56, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

I hope you don't think I'm against you. I assume you're here in good faith and I'd ask you to do the same for me. I'm just drawing your attention so some behavioural and editing guidelines that inform how Wikipedia works, as this is the kind of thing that can cause frustration for other editors and make it harder for you to make contributions in future.

I can see from your user page you pay a lot of attention to your number of edits, and to how frequently articles get updated. My personal view is that it's better to focus on quality, not quantity, and to remember that it's ok if some articles aren't being frequently fiddled with. Triptothecottage (talk) 06:18, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Ah, I see from your point of view. I'll try my best to contribute to Wikipedia in the future. It's all good now, however, I'm not against other contributors, they are trying to do their thing like me. Again, thank you very much for leaving this message on my talk page, have a good day, keep protecting Wikipedia and stay safe. PEPSI697 (talk) 06:40, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

June 2024

Please stop replacing images in infoboxes just because you think your own ones deserve to be there. That isn’t how it works. Seasider53 (talk) 07:46, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Are you actually referring to the ones I added back in Edinburgh Waverley railway station? Please remember that I am trying to help Wikipedia. Not hurt Wikipedia. Contributors on Wikipedia are unfortunately not perfect. If you mean't it was for me, please leave it on my talk page as it might be confusing to other contributors on who you're talking about.

It's not because I think my images deserve to be in the info-box. It is because I am trying to help Wikipedia like I said before.

I apologise if my behaviour came that way. Please keep protecting Wikipedia and have a nice day. PEPSI697 (talk) 08:24, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

I actually also saw the ones at Piccadilly Circus tube station that you've changed the image back to seeing your contributions.

However, I do know that is not how Wikipedia works. What I'm trying to do is help and update Wikipedia as I said before. PEPSI697 (talk) 08:35, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

If you are aware that that is not how Wikipedia works than please don't keep editing things in that same fashion. Valkriea (talk) 22:56, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

@Valkriea: thank you for leaving this on my talk page, however, in response to this, I'm trying to do the best as I can on Wikipedia, but unfortunately, I've recently screwed up a lot on editing Wikipedia. However, I'm trying to reduce my editing on Wikipedia and also trying to stop editing Wikipedia in that way. PEPSI697 (talk) 23:10, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

July 2024 Siemens Nexas Page

Just because they don't run on the northern lines particularly often doesn't mean that they don't serve the lines. I've read your prior subjects on your talk page and it seems that you enjoy changing pages because you think something doesn't happen often enough to be listed. Wikipedia is for factual evidence. The Siemans Nexas trains still do run on all three of the northern lines regularly. Valkriea (talk) 22:37, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for leaving this on my talk page too. However, I do enjoy editing on Wikipedia, but try to make useful contributions here as possible. On your diff on Siemens Nexas, I did mark your edit as good faith, however, it doesn't necessarily mean that you're doing bad job at Wikipedia. You're doing great, keep it up! Thank you for noticing other things I did on Wikipedia and the other subjects on my talk page. However, recently, I've opened up a discussion in the talk page of some articles to explain what was the matter. I try and make useful contributions to Wikipedia, but unfortunately, I've been screwing up a lot with editing lately. I just saw that you've reverted my edit here. this diff here, and that's ok by me, you can keep it as the lines served. PEPSI697 (talk) 23:55, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

The problem is that there is no reliable source provided one way or the other. I've had a look for recent stuff with no luck. I'd suggest that you both try and find a reliable source rather than slow edit warring. Triptothecottage (talk) 00:19, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Spot on! There is actually no reliable sources showing on which lines they operate on. We'll try and find one to show prove. Although, that includes no social media sites or enthusiast sites, they are considered not to be reliable sources. I've stopped with the slow edit warring on Siemens Nexas now. PEPSI697 (talk) 00:34, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

ANI

Hello, PEPSI697,

Although you have accumulated a lot of edits in a short period of time, you are still a relatively new editor, having only had an account for a few months. You might want to take a step back from handing out advice on an administrator's noticeboard (either one). I've even seen instances where you were quoting policy to editors and administrators who have been editing for a decade or longer as if they had never heard of it before. They are well aware of basic Wikipedia policies and guidelines.

I appreciate your desire to help but you are still learning yourself. Maybe confine your advice giving to the the Help Desk or the Teahouse where you can assist editors with less experience than yourself. It's not good to be over confident on Wikipedia because all editors make mistakes and there are always editors around who are more than willing to correct any errors you make. No editor or admin is immune from criticism, believe me! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:31, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Liz, Thank you very much for leaving this topic on my talk page! I appreciate it!

I understand that admins that have a lot more experience than me, since most admins have been on Wikipedia for 20 years or 10 years (Some for under 5 years).

I'm going to consider to take a step back from helping other contributors on ANI or other administrators' noticeboards related subjects and let the experienced editors or admins do the job.

However, I always knew about the Teahouse or Help Desk and had a look at it (even when I never edited those pages before). I'll probably consider helping contributors that are new or have less experience than me and give them some advice.

Thanks! PEPSI697 (talk) 02:01, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

August 2024

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template index/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. If you are going to be reverting vandalism, you NEED to be placing warnings on their talk pages. If not, then you really shouldn't be reverting edits as notifying users when you revert their edits (particularly vandalism) is part of the guideline.  $Jayhawker6$【💬】 02:02, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Actually, this is a good idea. I'll make sure to place warnings on the user or IP's talk page when reverting vandalism. The link is helpful. Thank you very much! PEPSI697 (talk) 02:05, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Deaf Hill reverts

You have reverted the edits in the Deaf Hill article. On my talk page you suggest I not use "bare references". This is fine, but rather than simply revert the edits why not convert the bare reference to the 'correct' style rather than remove the useful edit I made? Unless you have a problem with the content of the edit too? 2A0E:1D47:410F:3500:CCC3:699E:B6F6:77A2 (talk) 23:42, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I look at bad faith edits made by filtering in recent changes, I have a look wether they are good faith or bad faith and may not have time to convert the bare citation since I patrol recent changes. Obviously, I did notice your edit was good faith but should've marked your edits as "good faith", but forgot and used the rollback feature on Twinkle instead. I left a message on your talk page to just let you know how to properly add a citation. PEPSI697 (talk) 23:50, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

I am editing from my phone. I can't very easily put the reference in the format you would like. Please feel free to modify it to make it better, but please don't revert the whole lot just because of the format of the reference. If you don't have time to modify the format yourself then allow someone else to spot this and do it, or post it somewhere for someone to do. Whatever you decide to do, I ask that you undo your revert. 2A0E:1D47:410F:3500:CCC3:699E:B6F6:77A2 (talk) 00:06, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

I understand that adding a citation is very hard and difficult for less experienced editors, one suggestion is you could copy and paste another citation, but then change the URL, date, access date and website name). I can definitely see the tags "Mobile edit" or "Mobile web edit" under the list of your contributions. I edit from a mobile device too, but with more advanced features (when you create an account, go to settings and turn on "Advanced mobile edit", but wait for a few months until you have some experience). Again, you're welcome, thank you for leaving this topic on my talk page. PEPSI697 (talk) 00:10, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

You are in violation of WP:PRESERVE. I can't see how to revert edits on mobile, so ask that you please do so. 2A0E:1D47:410F:3500:CCC3:699E:B6F6:77A2 (talk) 01:16, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

@2A0E:1D47:410F:3500:CCC3:699E:B6F6:77A2 Ask that you revert your revert, I mean. 2A0E:1D47:410F:3500:CCC3:699E:B6F6:77A2 (talk) 01:20, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Good news for you and update regarding on this: I've reverted my own rollback and fixed the citation for you in this diff here. All good now! PEPSI697 (talk) 11:42, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Okay great. Thanks. When 'patrolling' in future perhaps bear in mind WP:PRESERVE. This whole process was unnecessarily complex and could put off a casual editor making occasional improvements to WP. 2A0E:1D47:410F:3500:CCC3:699E:B6F6:77A2 (talk) 23:50, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll in future when patrolling recent changes look a bit more carefully whether the edit should be kept or reverted. I agree that it was unnecessary of me to revert your edit on Deaf Hill, I should of looked a bit more carefully and maybe could've just fixed the citation for you rather than rollbacking your edits made to that article. PEPSI697 (talk) 01:59, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Yep, I can see under WP:PRESERVE, it says Repairing a dead link if a new URL for the page or an archive of the old one can be located. I'll revert my edits and maybe fix the citation for you.

To revert edits on mobile, create an account, after a few months of experience to revert edits with Twinkle, go to settings > advanced mobile editing (only if you have an account), for IP users, it'll have to be standard mobile editing or manual revert. PEPSI697 (talk) 01:23, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Substituting warn templates

Hi! Please remember to substitute warn templates on User talk pages as directed on the template, otherwise any future edits to the page will alter your message. For instance, I am trying to add a warning on User talk:121.99.220.149, but when I do so it replaces your username on your first warn with mine-- using substituted templates instead will ensure that your messages remain as-is. Thanks! Blue Edits (talk) 07:03, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for leaving this on my talk page. Good to know that. However I do uw-delete1 for example just because it was quicker to type, but I'll use substs:uw-delete1 in future warning templates on user talk pages. However, I do always have a look at Wikipedia:Template index/User talk namespace for templates since it's very helpful. Although AnomieBOT is a computer program that fixes templates, but does not always do it. So that will mean less computer programmed bots will not having to keep coming back in. I'll make sure to do this in future edits. Thank you very much! PEPSI697 (talk) 07:13, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

August 2024

Hello, and thank you for removing vandalism from Ramon Abatti. We appreciate this, but unfortunately your edit was not successful in restoring the article to its pre-vandalised state. For future reference, it is better to deal with vandalism by checking the article's page history to determine how it appeared before it was vandalised. You can then restore the whole article, or the relevant part of it, to an appropriate earlier version. If you simply delete the visible vandalism then any content removed or overwritten by the vandal is lost. See How to deal with vandalism for details. Thank you. - Sumanuil. _{(talk to me)} 01:25, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for leaving this on my talk page.

I would definitely confirm that I have not looked at the revision history, only one diff, however, I patrol recent changes by filtering bad faith edits. Also, when I use Twinkle, it normally reverts lots of edits in a row by the same IP or user. However, it probably was an error and should of have clicked the "undo" feature but did not check the revision history of that article. It was also probably because the IP constantly changed as it does sometimes when editing with IP.

I will keep that in mind to check the revision history to make sure if more than 1 edit was made. PEPSI697 (talk) 03:47, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

A message for you

You have a nice rest of your day. 98.235.155.81 (talk) 22:05, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. You too, have a nice day too. PEPSI697 (talk) 22:07, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome. 98.235.155.81 (talk) 22:08, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Whacked with a trout!

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Recently malfunctioned by not checking the diffs and misread the edit summaries when reverting bad faith edits

PEPSI697 (talk) 10:23, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

CS1 error on South Geelong railway station

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page South Geelong railway station, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 08:57, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Hat tip

Heya fellow patroller on duty! Hats off to you for reverting Pretty Hate Machine almost one second after the disruptive edit was made. Happen to drop by your userpage to discover you joined a few months ago and already accumulated 4500 edits.. (while I joined almost 2 years ago and haven't even made it to 100!) Scuffedsherm (talk) 11:09, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for leaving this topic on my talk page. Thank you for noticing my edit counts. Yes, I have nearly 5,000 edits in just 5 months of editing Wikipedia. I've been doing a lot of work and patrolling with bad faith edits. Some editors on Wikipedia may be lucky to accumulate 4,000+ edits in under 5 months. Some people may have their edits slowly growing from about the past few years. PEPSI697 (💬 • 📝) 11:14, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

No problem! Do you have any tips on conducting patrols? I find myself with multiple tabs cross-checking revision differences and was wondering if there's any other way to do so? Scuffedsherm (talk) 11:36, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, there is. It's called "recent changes" and you can filter it to "likely bad faith" or "very likely bad faith". To view recent changes, click to the menu bar or sidebar (next to the Wikipedia logo) and then click "recent changes". PEPSI697 (💬 • 📝) 12:42, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Whacked with another trout!

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Made a typo in the edit summary when reverting at Hush (TV series), at this diff here. Was mean't to say "mean't to be capitalised" at the end of the summary

PEPSI697 (💬 • 📝) 21:56, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

About user warnings

Hey, when you reverted vandalism on 9/11: The Twin Towers, you didn't leave a warning on User talk:Ilikekids12043. Thought I'd give you a heads-up. Keep up the good work! Grumpylawnchair (talk) 00:11, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know, I didn't even realise that I didn't leave a message on their talk page. I thought I did but I think I forgot to leave a message on their talk page. Again, thanks for letting me know this. PEPSI697 (💬 • 📝) 00:14, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

No problem at all. Nice to see another neurodivergent person on here, honestly. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 00:17, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

User talk:167.98.65.71

Why did you strike through my warning and leave the same warning yourself? APK hi :-) (talk) 09:07, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

At second glance, we must've tried reverting the vandalism at the same time because I thought my rollback went through. APK hi :-) (talk) 09:09, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Oh sorry about that, I coincidentally rollbacked the IP's edit at the same time as you. The reason why I strike your message because I thought you were actually leaving the message even though you weren't the contributor who reverted it. It was a mistake, again, sorry about striking your comment. PEPSI697 (💬 • 📝) 09:22, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Squall

The content was mostly about the US, hence. There is often US-centric on en.wiki 2402:E280:3D1D:563:5C26:4BCC:12AF:E31E (talk) 07:16, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Bye 2402:E280:3D1D:563:5C26:4BCC:12AF:E31E (talk) 07:19, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Having another look at the article, correct that the content was mostly about the U.S., I think I may of made a mistake. It didn't appear constructive to me so that's why I reverted your revisions. You can keep the changed content you've added. PEPSI697 (💬 • 📝) 07:21, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Speaking as a long-time watcher of the article, I just reverted all their edits there wholesale. Graham87 (talk) 19:25, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

September 2024

I am a reliable source mate. Stop deleting my stuff 😖😔 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:DD2D:B300:1993:3B8A:3684:E481 (talk) 23:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

The only reason I reverted your edit was because you didn't provide a reliable source. Even if you provide facts, it still needs to be supported by reliable sources so it could be verified. However, if you want to add a Twitch citation, Twitch and every other social media sites are not reliable sources. I left a note on your talk page explaining why I've reverted it. I would recommend you to see Wikipedia policies WP:RS, WP:CITE, WP:SOCIALMEDIA and WP:V. Thank you. PEPSI697 (💬 • 📝) 23:33, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For your great work on Australian railway stations and vandalism patrolling. Theroadislong (talk) 12:15, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much! This really cheered me up. PEPSI697 (💬 • 📝) 12:18, 1 October 2024 (UTC)